LOS ANGELES | Downtown Project Rundown 3.0

[Kingofthehill]

Originally Posted by RuFFy

I'm no expert by any means, but I believe more and more people are opening up to the possibility of living car free. After having lived in NY (this is not a comparison) I'd LOVE nothing more than to live car free, permanently. I believe more people are going to be willing to give up yards and the typical suburban California stuff in favor of walkable neighborhoods and that downtowns growth trend will continue. Now, I don't believe this specifically will create more skyscrapers, but I believe cleaned up neighborhoods might open the eyes of those who don't really look downtown to the possibility. What I believe will lead to more skyscrapers is the transportation system meeting in downtown. It's in a company's best interest to locate itself in a place accessible to a larger populace, and hopefully a more educated one as well. Now, I'm not saying downtown is the only place positioned to take advantage of this access, but it is increasing more and more. I imagine as people start to move toward the central city, perhaps some businesses will follow them.

60% of LA's residents live in apartments or other, multifamily units. Not that apartment living is synonymous with "urbanity," though. The real number is actually alot higher, as many people live in de-facto multifamily layouts (e.g, immigrants in Boyle Heights or Pico-Union living in divided up SFH's).

[Illithid Dude]

Originally Posted by ThreeHundred

But above all else, I would much rather see the Historic Core filled with residences and South Park built up with numerous 7-15 story midrises. I think we are in mutual agreement that Los Angeles will never have a massive skyline along the lines of Chicago or Miami. Hell..we barely edge out Houston. And you know what? I'm perfectly fine with that. Infill and the improvement on the downtown that we already have is what's important to me. DTLA is one of a handful of truly urban downtowns in the US and I want to see people fully embrace that fact. Leave all the 'lets put a skyscraper here and see what happens' mentality to Dubai and Miami.

I don't really think that is going to happen. Though you say that L.A. Will never reach the heights of Chicago or NY, developers seem to think differently, and they constantly propose very tall buildings. And honestly, you never know how are skyline will look in ten years. As places like Miami and Dubai have shown, it only takes one building boom to change everything. I mean, how was Miami ten years ago? People probably were saying the same thing, how they would never have a skyline to match Chicago or New York. Now look at them. L.A. Has enough proposals that if half of them went through, we would almost be beating out Miami (this is including non-downtown buildings). So, I wouldn't quite say something so definitive yet, because when a city decides to change, it often decided to change very quickly.

On another note, does anyone know the developer of Zen? In 2009, they reported that Zen was going to break ground is 2011. I am curious to know if that is still the case. With all the recent news, 2011 is shaping up to be a great year from downtown.

Lastly, someone better make a new thread soon. 10,000 posts will be upon is before you know it. I would hate for there to be a period of time where there was no thread on downtown L.A.

[colemonkee]

^ The Kawada Group is the developer of Zen, who also owns the Kawada Hotel adjacent to the site.

As for a new thread, they don't stop at 10,000, it's just an agreed upon limit to keep the servers from having to store too much information. So if we go to 10,099, for example, the thread won't shut down.

[JDRCRASH]

I was thinking: rather than update page 1, it might be best to wait until the next thread is created.

Originally Posted by Illithid Dude

I don't really think that is going to happen. Though you say that L.A. Will never reach the heights of Chicago or NY, developers seem to think differently, and they constantly propose very tall buildings. And honestly, you never know how are skyline will look in ten years. As places like Miami and Dubai have shown, it only takes one building boom to change everything. I mean, how was Miami ten years ago? People probably were saying the same thing, how they would never have a skyline to match Chicago or New York. Now look at them.

You have a point that we might underestimate LA, but there are a couple things to keep in mind:

1. It's probably true that there is more demand in LA(and that's not a lot) than Dubai for some of those massive projects. But, the latter has mountains of wealth at it's disposal, so much that the government can fund much of the major projects, allowing developers to finish them.

2. Miami, like LA, is pretty much geographically "trapped", meaning that pretty much UP is the only way to go. However, Miami is much smaller than the LA area, and has even less room to sprawl.

[Lipani]

A fairly long, but interesting read on the two stadium proposals:
http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=AlybHrNsklkG7I2nezUnEls5nYcB?slug=jc-nfllosangeles122110

[Just-In-Cali]

Originally Posted by Lipani

A fairly long, but interesting read on the two stadium proposals:
http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=AlybHrNsklkG7I2nezUnEls5nYcB?slug=jc-nfllosangeles122110

It is an interesting article, though the writer clearly favors the Industry site. He does raise some good points about the traffic and parking issues, which Im curious to see what Leiweke has in mind to combat those. But the writer also went out of his way to avoid the problems with the Industry site. Traffic through that area is slow on a good day on the 60 fwy, its far from any other entertainment or major venues, ensuring a a fun "drive there, drive home" mentality which we've been trying to move away from in SoCal. The simple issue of "Who wants to drive all the way to Industry?" for a football game, especially with the apathetic feelings most in Socal have towards the NFL anyway. Its a long, congested drive to a non destination, one I fear Angelenos will hesitate to make. There is sparce public transportation, especially in light of the newly completed and planned lightrail and subways going in downtown. His huge emphasis on "tailgating" is definatly a point, but that has to be taken with a grain of salt as we have no idea that the practice would even be a major issue if patrons have dozens of other options for entertainment. Plus the vanity of not wanting another situation like "the Los Angeles Angels at Anaheim", another place using LA's name and cache, despite being miles from the city. Im not sold on the downtown stadium yet, and frankly i could care less about the NFL, but I'd have to see more of their answers to some of these important questions, but Id like to be optimistic.
Thats my rant.

[202_Cyclist]

A local blog here, Greater Greater Washington, has a debate about urban football stadiums.

http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post/8568/ggw-debates-urban-football-stadiums-in-dc/

With the Staples Center, there is basketball, hockey, concerts, and other events. Football stadiums require a massive amount of land (and parking) for twenty events per year. That said, the Gensler proposal looks very attractive and the location next to the freeway and other sports/entertainment venues seems more desirable than other possible downtown locations.

[Sodha]

Originally Posted by Just-In-Cali

It is an interesting article, though the writer clearly favors the Industry site. He does raise some good points about the traffic and parking issues, which Im curious to see what Leiweke has in mind to combat those. But the writer also went out of his way to avoid the problems with the Industry site. Traffic through that area is slow on a good day on the 60 fwy, its far from any other entertainment or major venues, ensuring a a fun "drive there, drive home" mentality which we've been trying to move away from in SoCal. The simple issue of "Who wants to drive all the way to Industry?" for a football game, especially with the apathetic feelings most in Socal have towards the NFL anyway. Its a long, congested drive to a non destination, one I fear Angelenos will hesitate to make. There is sparce public transportation, especially in light of the newly completed and planned lightrail and subways going in downtown. His huge emphasis on "tailgating" is definatly a point, but that has to be taken with a grain of salt as we have no idea that the practice would even be a major issue if patrons have dozens of other options for entertainment. Plus the vanity of not wanting another situation like "the Los Angeles Angels at Anaheim", another place using LA's name and cache, despite being miles from the city. Im not sold on the downtown stadium yet, and frankly i could care less about the NFL, but I'd have to see more of their answers to some of these important questions, but Id like to be optimistic.
Thats my rant.

So everything is based on traffic and not the economic value of a team or stadium. It looks like everything has to be decided because of automobile traffic. Just beause you cannot tailgate, then we shouldn't have a stadium in downtown LA. That's a weak arguement. At the end of the article, it does state how more convenient the downtown Atlanta stadium is compared to outside a city. But, that of course is the after-thought, because cars are good and pedestrian environment is bad.

[Sodha]

Originally Posted by pesto

1. There is no reason to believe a large company will leave City X and move to DT LA. It just hasn't happened in the past and the cost, tax and regulation detriments of doing so are large.

2. Highrises tend toward law, accounting, consulting, finance and such. These tend to grow organically with the city, not in big spurts detached from the region in general.

1. Nearly all accounting firms in the '90s moved from satellite offices around LA county and consolidated in downtown Los Angeles. None have moved out since.

2. Herbalife relocated from Century City into downtown Los Angeles (LA Live!) in 2008 (http://ir.herbalife.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=183888&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=931685&highlight=)

3. Gensler is considering a move to downtown Los Angeles (http://la.curbed.com/archives/2010/12/everything_is_illuminated_santa_monicas_big_wave_gets_lit.php)

[pesto]

sodha:

1. How does this relate to "Leaving City X and moving to LA"? Every one of these is a move within LA. Taxes and regulation played no part, just high rents on the westside.

2. The major accounting firms were always overwhelmingly in DT. There has been some additional shift of accounting firms away from the westside to DT (much lower rents) but there are still offices, typically in the OC or the valley.

3. The progam to attract companies to LA began back before Tom Bradley and had only 1 or 2 successes in 40 years (Arco moved to DT and was later acquired; a couple of shipping companies moved a couple dozen people to DT and later went out of business; City Bank moved hundreds but largely unwound after the "junk bond" collapse). The program is universally recognized as a failure.

[Just-In-Cali]

Jeez, Im sorry I even mentioned other companies moving from other areas to downtown. Lets just leave it at "some companies MAY relocate to downtown given advancements in public transport and a possible shiny new trophy tower"
And leave it at that.

PS, I have family and friends that live in Riverside Co, in the Temecula, Perris, Moreno Valley and Menifee areas. They have already started preping the Metrolink Station in Perris, its quite nice...though its only being used as a bus hub until the tracks are ready.
Anyway, they all said overwhelmingly that they would totally go downtown and beyond if they can ride the trains in...especially for games with the Lakers and any possible football team or conventions or concerts. Ive also been spreading the word about the different attractions and the museums and art galleries DT, and many seemed really enthused.

[pesto]

Sorry. I see business growth in DT as being small, innovative, arts-related, technical. Worrying about major companies uprooting and moving here is a waste of time. Part of the "blockbuster" mentality. Real growth comes from many people and small businesses seeing the attractions of working and living DT.

Trains to DT I can get 100 percent behind. A fast and convenient way of getting DT is among the highest priorties. You match these with (1) a reason to go DT and (2) a pleasant experience (attractive streetscape and buildings, fewer homeless) when you're there and you are well on your way to NY or SF. No reason that DT and Hollywood can't be like central London, attracting people from 30-100 miles away for the evening or for a one night shared-room stay.

[pesto]

http://la.curbed.com/archives/2010/12/pa...ans_to_dress_up_the_fashion_district.php

Oddly, here is something that is exactly what I would like to see more of. This is a general proposal for improving the fashion district. 2000 plus entrepreneurs already there on 150 blocks; the idea is to boost small businesses by adding parks, affordable housing, centers for fashion shows and meetings that will actually be used; walkable neighborhoods; streetcars to Staples and Bway and all of DT. The city supporting what private industry has already started and carried forward.

Organic rather than decreed from above.

[Illithid Dude]

I'm surprised nobody has said this yet, but on Jan. 6 the renderings for the Broad Collection will be shown, and work is expected to start in April. This is all from Curbed La, BTW.

[edluva]

Originally Posted by pesto

http://la.curbed.com/archives/2010/12/pa...ans_to_dress_up_the_fashion_district.php

Oddly, here is something that is exactly what I would like to see more of. This is a general proposal for improving the fashion district. 2000 plus entrepreneurs already there on 150 blocks; the idea is to boost small businesses by adding parks, affordable housing, centers for fashion shows and meetings that will actually be used; walkable neighborhoods; streetcars to Staples and Bway and all of DT. The city supporting what private industry has already started and carried forward.

Organic rather than decreed from above.

decreeing we have a fashion disctrict is a lot different from actually having a substantive one. this is not organic btw. organic is something that doesn't require self-conscious proposals to create fashion shows where fashion shows don't organically want to be to begin with. who is going to hold a show there?

la always wants to be a west coast version of new york - it has to have a fashion center, a times square, a skyline, etc. so self concsious. la is soenamored with the image of another city, it fails to be what it is.

[BrandonJXN]

Originally Posted by edluva

decreeing we have a fashion disctrict is a lot different from actually having a substantive one. this is not organic btw. organic is something that doesn't require self-conscious proposals to create fashion shows where fashion shows don't organically want to be to begin with. who is going to hold a show there?

la always wants to be a west coast version of new york - it has to have a fashion center, a times square, a skyline, etc. so self concsious. la is soenamored with the image of another city, it fails to be what it is.

My God you're unpleasant. Do you go to orphanages and tell them that there is no Santa?

[pesto]

ed: Merry Christmas!

I don't see how anything could be more organic. Small entrepreneurs trying to keep businesses afloat, hustling for business; arguing with lenders, customers and suppliers; violating laws to stay in business; living on the edge. Newcomers learning the biz, starting their own and looking for a big break.

There are already a 1000 fashion shows in the area. You are thinking of the major press-oriented events in Paris, but realilty is that small groups of buyers and suppliers hold shows every day, formally and informally. This is real wholesale business, orders by phone; fulfilled that day from local stock or from China if necessary.

Some small cooperative centers for holding these meetings would be something the city could encourage, as would the maintenance of repaired, cleaned exteriors, since individual landlords are not likely to do it unless everyone is going to do it.

But I agree; let the businesses tell the City what the City can do for them; don't try to reinvent the area. Having said this, design, merchandising, management, PR and the like are not exactly foreign to the area or to the arts district up the road.

[bmfarley]

So, is anything planned and is "A GO" for these two blocks?

Pico to 11th St.
Fig to Flower



Two pages back, I referenced a proposed development. But, it appears that one is going nowhere.

[citywatch]

Originally Posted by pesto

This is a general proposal for improving the fashion district.

when I've walked & driven around there, one thing that has stood out to me is how way over the top it is when it comes to grunge. I know some ppl think that grit is "kewl" or hip----that it's honest deconstructionism----but imo it's way too much. iow, it's just plain super fugly.



eric richardson flickr


findtarget.com


^ these pics are dedicated to edluva

[citywatch]

Originally Posted by bmfarley

So, is anything planned and is "A GO" for these two blocks?

the block bounded by 11th, 12th & fig is where a proj called LA central was supposed to go up. the devlpr about 2 yrs ago even started to close down the parking lot & installed a construction barricade. but nothing went forward.

as far as I know, that proj----as is true of so many others----is on hold due to problems in getting funding & the fall of local housing prices.